(kurz nach 14 uhr erreichbar) Le Monde Diplomatique – Beitrag in französischer Sprache – Perquisition dans les locaux de l’hébergeur suédois de WikiLeaks et The Pirate Bay – LEMONDE.FR | 07.09.10 | 12h04 Mis à jour le 07.09.10 | 13h24 – die kurze tickerchannel-zusammenfassung lautete wenig später: Police raid the Pirate Bay’s and Wikileaks’ ISP, 7 persons detained (wn030: …according to Le Monde, there were arrests reported at PRQ, in 2006, als bei dieser gelegenheit auch mehrere geräte beschlagnahmt wurden. This time no official arrests at PRQ, according to same Le Monde, but “questions” are reported. In Sweden in total: 4 arrests reported at 2 p.m. And – returning to the questioning – since “questions” like this, if done with less stress, are done via a written invitation by the police (which btw. in sev countries, like in GER for example, you don’t have to follow) – and in this case we are NOT talking about a written invitation to a “talk and answer” game in a police station, this sentence needs a further look. For example, in germany some people differentiate between a “festnahme” and a “festnahme”. In any case – even in a “short” arrest of several hours – in bigger demonstrations like anti-G8 or anti-NATO even longer… – those people lose their basic human right: their freedom. Police likes to differentiate between an arrest and arrest, e.g. an arrest after a court decision, an arrest in “U-Haft” (pre-court decision arrest) and a “no-no-no arrest! that’s no arrest!” of sev hours when people for example were taking part in a manifestation against, let’s say, nazis. We do n.o.t. differentiate (between “arrest” and “arrest” and “arrest” , between “detention” and “detention” – or between “festnahme” and “festnahme”) that way. Stealing people’s freedom by an ‘enttabuisierte’ police structure (a police structure with removed taboos) is nothing else, it stays an arrest. So let’s wait for further details about this before claiming that mparent77XXY__ chose a wrong ticker-textline for his link – who btw tweeted it a bit later than 2 p.m.).

(kurz nach 19h erreichbar…) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/07/p2p_police_raid/ – “… Swedish police raided several addresses this morning, including an ISP linked to Wikileaks, while assisting a Belgian file-sharing probe. Four Swedish nationals were arrested following raids on residential addresses, Umea University and two ISPs. Computers and servers were seized but police stressed the investigation was centred on specific IP addresses. …”

nach mitternacht auf den 8.9.: http://www.thelocal.se/28826/20100907/ – “Swedish police raided locations across the country on Tuesday, including WikiLeaks’ ISP PRQ, acting on information from Belgian police in an international operation targeting the filesharing network known as “The Scene”…”

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/09/major-file-sharing-bust-in-europe-targets-p2p-admins.ars – “…PRQ was one of the targeted ISPs. “At 9:00 this morning, five policemen were here,” PRQ’s Mikael Viberg told the file-sharing news site Torrentfreak. “They were interested in who were using two IP addresses from 2009 and onwards. We have no records of our clients but we’re handing over the e-mail addresses for those behind the IPs. However, it’s rare that our clients have mail addresses that are traceable.”…”

new york times vom 8.9. – http://www.nytimes.com/external/readwriteweb/2010/09/07/07readwriteweb-police-in-14-countries-raid-file-sharing-ho-73077.html – “… Five policemen showed up yesterday morning at PRQ, the company that in part hosts Wikileaks, and asked about two IP addresses used in 2009. The company handed over email addresses associated with the IP addresses, which are the only records it keeps on its clients. No servers or computers were confiscated, the company said. The raid comes as Wikileaks is preparing to release 15,000 classified documents related to the war in Afghanistan, which the U.S. government is anxious to prevent. …”

…btw “back to something relevant” (away from personaldebatten and private stuff of pips who… experienced a voluntary exposition of their ‘private style on feierabend’ by a female brotherhood person with the wish to be elected in next elections, a win ‘um jeden preis’, with every method, with every ally and against every political opponent, may this be even the pirates… and regardless of the question if this may lead to even such ridiculous clashes like the trial to forbid mature consensual sex while child pornography in pentagon…), so – lets look “away” from this topic area e.g. to another journalism topic, the fight for the freedom of it.

(and a 2nd btw: feel free to follow the update re bradley manning on the lower [but large] part of this page here (scroll down there, it’s just before the complementation part begins) (wn030: oh and btw just for the case that you stumble over a text line.. we did not hear another “pre-coffee-stage” sentences like the ones quoted there [which, btw., were translations, not quoted from original sources], so… seriously, the rumour is nebelkerzen. nothing else.)

Hello, they didnt target any wikileaks it was a bust about warez sites, to be exactly about those BAR (.se), DLR (.nl) LOST (.cz) NN (.it) and SC (.pl) so no worry about wikileaks at all. i hope you feel better about it now :]

dear washingtonpost. let us please comment on a sentence we recently (today) discovered in an article published (today) in your newspaper. It seems you fell on a so-called theoretical paradoxon [arising from the field and area of the so-called ‘ideen’…] [not necessarily the same field as the field and area typically described as ‘research’….] which we ignored so far but to find it repeated even at the beginning of the second week in september in a newspaper like yours give us a good reason to finally type a few words about this.

Let us quote your sentence please: “”Ironically, (the spokesperson for the English speaking hemisphere, edited by wn030) came to Sweden for protection from his enemies. The Pirate Party, a Swedish political group …”

alright, so far. the newspapers that wrote this thought [in an extremely similar form] (weeks ago), backed up on the … ‘idee’… that due to the fact that WL publishes material (like, for example, material proving war crimes, with, for example obviously questionable declaration of such material as “classified” by government or military structures), while the pirates fight for the right of privacy of individuals (to protect them, for example, from getting lost in governmental or military strucure databanks, databanks prepared in order to catch them faster and easier in case such an individual may also have some doubts about the government’s or military’s rights to classify crimes revealing documents…) – that due to this fact a publication platform and a political movement doubting in the sense of internet censorship, vorratsdatenspeicherung and similar ideas used to mute critical human beings, revealing the anti-democratical aims of such censorship efforts if looked at them thoroughly… (btw a political movement also being able to publish someting interesting here and there from time to time… http://www.piratenpartei.de/100908-Piratenpartei-veroeffentlicht-INDECT-Dokumente )… that due to all this fact – according to the ‘idee’, those both [WL and Pirates] must be “enemies”?

seriously: if america would be able to treat their enemies like that, then well done, may it be… – sadly enough, if you allow us to remind you of the typical US-style to treat their “enemies”… this expression in the quoted sentence does not nessecarily seem to be a well chosen one, don’t you think? (was your journi a bit tired when writing this? no prob, we understand this, but seriously, dear washingtonpost – if this would have been a truck or train driver not a journalist, this could cost pips their lifes. even if an article is just an article – plz do organize some good black coffe for your journis. fair-traded coffee, btw, is extremely “in” in editorial surroundings (i.e.: super-trendy), so maybe you and your journis will like this proposal.

The WP article seems to merely be highlighting the social disputes between individuals. It is also suggesting that Assange has no allies, or fewer allies than one might think. Yet the social, interpersonal disputes between a handful of individuals say nothing about the nature of the ties between the Pirate Party and Wikileaks. Only 2 women and one man.

wn030: partly. it’s a bit more than just being (another one) falling back to personal topics and forgetting a) in fact, about the ties around and their nature, but b) also forgetting about real topics simply a bit obviously waiting for a journi to get in research action (child pornography in pentagon. have you already seen a wp-article about it?). but coming back to the quoted sentence: it simply looks as if the journi mixed something or did not reach the information yet that actually the female person embarassing herself with her ridiculous claims (while other female people experience real, serious violence. think about kongo… think about real male violence – ) – her, driving this ridiculous self-embarassing case on while knowing that the facts proving a simple normal consensual quickie-stuff… that these facts revealed in the first report can hardly turn themself to “invisible” again, that this female person is driving this all on – as a brotherhood person with the hope to be elected, so misusing real serious topics for her very own political fight lust – a political fight which is lead against, among others, of course against the big-big-big upcoming pirates party danger. this all seems to have simply been forgotten by the journi while writing the quoted sentence, although mentioning a part of these facts in the later paragraphs. seriously: journis – “ideas” are something else than research…

Well, you’re right that there isn’t much real journalism going on here.

I really don’t think this kind of behavior is going to help her, however. She made of her fool of herself in the process of leaking this allegation. That is the most suspicious thing about this whole scenario: The fact that it got out into the public eye so quickly. The Swedish system isn’t like the US system. Accused individuals do not usually make headlines right away because there is discretion in the legal and law enforcement process.

Not this time!

wn030: she is constantly making a fool of herself. starting with the fact that mainly, the quickie-stuff was ok for her (except for the fact that her condom collection seems to need an “update”, some gummis with a more recent fabrication day), but in general: the quickie-stuff obviously was in the “grüne bereich”, until she spoke with the second female … (erm.. with the pc wire käseplatte bunny). – an extremely feministic brotherhood person, isn’t it? needing a pc wire käseplattenbunny to make up her own decisions what to think about a quickie stuff and how to do deal with it. gosh…

but in general: let’s see what the swedish pirates will do with it. usually they should have started a funny campaign about this long ago. perfect. really perfect tweet i saw from a german language pirate flaschenpost account made a wunderful short comment to this: “we herewith proudly announce that we will definitely fuck on with swedish chicks, may this be on swedish ground or not!”… :] and stuff like that. anyway – a perfect, per-fect starter for a funny, crispy campaign, all they (the swedish pirates) have to do is to pick the topic up…

…btw yes, this here is worth a link…http://www.rferl.org/content/The_Cracks_In_WikiLeaks_/2152428.html
(“In the end, to use Katchadourian’s other remark, WikiLeaks is a “media insurgency” — Assange is just the match that lit the fire. I see the merit in Jonsdottir’s position: it’s just good business sense not to have any organization, most of all one dealing with such sensitive matters as WikiLeaks, too dependent upon or too identified with any one person.”

wn030: we agree here, absolutely. but the “dependance” mythos is co-created by media which were simply getting more and more concentrating on the spokespip for the English speaking hemisphere in the last weeks, on the spokespip as a person instead of his function, role and what he mediates. at least, a part of the media landscape did. that’s the problem here and it’s no one else’s but the media’s own responsibility to return to normal work again regarding this question. of course, the publishing of the aggressive pr of the former administration some weeks ago in the same newspaper mentioned in the page complement above (talking about the stuff of the speechwriter for the former erm… – this one strange figure in the whitehouse once, what was his name again… shoe dart board? i think his name was shoe dart board) anyway – this speechwriter pr text published in the mentioned newspaper(<- scroll down a bit after link click) – so, this publishing made a concentration necessary; but proceeding with this beyond the borders of the role and function itself is misunderstanding what wl itself – originally – is representing. the platform of a network. not to mention that it's this belief in such a dependance making speechwriters’ publications like the mentioned one possible at all… and since we all know about the vulnerability of the clientéle around the speechwriter for shoe dart board for myths and beliefs – feeding, as media, their secularized religion – shows less capability of insight into their (the media’s) own role than expected. let’s please not forget we’re talking about people who are ready to spend valuable sunday morning times in churches in order to be elected, ready to swear and let swear on holy books in courts just in order to afterwars call another break of one of its basic rules a ‘legal’ one…

eine zusammenfassung einiger zurückhaltender positionen und kritischer stimmen bietet diese seite hier: http://toronto.mediacoop.ca/story/wikileaks-and-politics-whistleblowing/
quotation: “…WikiLeaks is now something of a misnomer. Originally, it was a wiki, with an open submission and publication process. John Young, the respected architect and activist behind Cryptome (a site that predates Wikileaks by a decade), was invited to be its public face. Young parted ways with WikiLeaks only a few weeks after, citing philosophical differences. … Nevertheless, for all it’s faults (and there are many potential grounds on which to criticize the sustainability of the WikiLeaks model) WikiLeaks currently represents the desire of information to be free. On the other side institutions like the Pentagon and Executive branches of government represent the desire to control it….”) – wn030: and – at the same time, a self-made turning away from this desire and former own aim, as WL itself, at least from the publicly announced one. information-hierarchy collaboration, is anyone able to call paid pre-views for established media differently?
it looks as if there is a need for a reliable wl alternative. what would such an alterantive need? – refusal of self-made dependance on money from a party interested in information hierarchy, in which way ever. broad funds, web based instead. wl began it but it seems to think web based funds are too much effort, media dollars are easier money. as a tendency, new trend there, we wouldn’t exclude this. it simply makes this obvious impression. an alternative needs a recognizable backing up on the thought of open source again. even the discussion pages on wl are closed down, we were told this option was there once. step-by-step, with this strategy it gets the look of a pure info-dealer company and – as much interesting as the documents itself may be – there’s no sense in bothering about the success or failure of a former network platform turning to a pure interest company. we’re not an ad service.

wn030: we not only needed it, we still need it. a global mechanism, a working one. wl now, with a “closed-source”-attempt and paid previews, is not the sought and needed solution. let’s see who’s gonna start a next approach and how long we’ll have to wait for it.

.

and while we disagree in many points with Brigitta (for those who missed the discussion: Brigitta called for a personal change. wn030: we’re not sure if a “rather dull” spokesperson is really what wl needs or what could change the concentration of media on a person – this is media’s self-responsibility. give the media landscape a “rather dull” spokesperson and they will write about the dullness if they want to keep it personal, that’s not the point. a spokeperson him- or herself can perfectly care how to lead an interview with a journalist, where to focus it to and what questions to refuse, for example. discussions lead inside, reminding the spokesperson of his role, can be probably more helpfulful.)

but aside of those points where we disagree, we definitely underline and stress the following:

“…wikileaks has grown so much in the last few months but the needed structure of more horizontal nature has not grown the same – most of us working as volunteers for wikileaks do not feel at ease with pyramid structure in power.” (Birgitta Jónsdóttir, sept 6th 2010, http://cryptome.org/0002/wikileaks-clarify.htm )

yyyes, actually, to be honest, vertical power structures simply do not seem to fit to what wl once wanted to represent in public. the question is – does wl still have a chance to return to what it once represented in public [and if yes, how long will it take it to get back there, talking about the “closed-source”-loook-and-feel of the page right now and the infodeals] or are we talking about groups of volunteers as the working people supporting the network with their working time – and a few pips forming the mentioned arising info-deal company. if the 2nd – how long will the volunteers need to organize an own network if the infodeal party already decided to say goodbye to the original thought.

final comment: so, if the “dependance” mentioned here is hinting at more than just the picture created for the public – if the internal structure in fact changed to a vertical one, we indeed wish wl a productive next meeting. changing the roles – as proposed by the person who started this branch of the discussion – is definitely not the solution, the next spokesperson can easily face similar problems. wl seems to need an internal debate of a more general kind.

etwas später brigitta dazu. “…If you had a startup company, it’s very hard when it grows to let go of your vision, or your idealism, or the way you do things. So I could see that WikiLeaks was morphing. The tendency is if you have an organic grassroots movements, it doesn’t matter if there’s one person that’s sort of leading the way because there are still very organic discussion-based decisions being made. When you morph into a larger structure, there are so many more responsibilities that come with that. You need to be able to utilize more people because there are just so many different responsibilities that come with it. So if you don’t have a very good structure in place, it is a very big danger that people will become disgruntled. There is not enough transparency within the organization about decisions and not good enough communication flow and in order for a good communication flow, you have to have good structure and know whose role is appointed to each other. I just wanted to have a debate about this with sort of the core group of volunteers and I couldn’t. I tried for a long time and it didn’t happen. …” http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/15/qa-former-wikileaks-spokeswoman-birgitta-jonsdottir/

… “They are sending a message, it’s not just about my information. It’s a warning for anyone who had anything to do with WikiLeaks,” she said. “It is completely unacceptable for the US justice department to flex its muscles like this. I am lucky, I’m a representative in parliament. But what of other people? It’s my duty to do whatever I can to stop this abuse.” …

… “usa government wants to know about all my tweets and more since november 1st 2009,” she continued a few minutes later. “do they realize i am a member of parliament in iceland?” …

…also readble (submitted 8.1.) is the following: http://wlcentral.org/node/852
…but take care while reading not to refer the “while this seems not in any way confirmed” to the sentence before, it seems obviously to refer to the subsequent part of the sentence (while this is not in any way confirmed…)

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,14758284,00.html Iceland blasts US demand for lawmaker’s details in WikiLeaks probe – Icelandic politicians have blasted US demands for Twitter to hand over a member of parliament’s account details. Birgitta Jonsdottir faces investigation as one of several people connected to the website WikiLeaks. …

comment just found online:
killassange.com was registered on Dec 21, 2010. Perhaps, something for DoJ to investigate instead of going after Twitter?

—

http://paranoia.dubfire.net/2011/01/thoughts-on-doj-wikileakstwitter-court.html – “Amateur Hour. The 2703(d) order misspelled the names of one of the targets, Rop Gonggrijp. It also requested credit card and bank account numbers of several Twitter users, even though Twitter is a free service and so doesn’t have such information (presumably someone at DOJ knows a little about Twitter, since the agency has 350,000 followers of its official Twitter account). … Given that the wikileaks investigation is the most high-profile national security investigation of the decade, and that the court order seeks records associated with an Icelandic member of parliament, you would think that DOJ would assign this case to someone more senior. …”

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70A5ZT20110111 – By Mark Hosenball – WASHINGTON | Tue Jan 11, 2011 3:58pm EST – (Reuters) – Two prominent WikiLeaks supporters in the Netherlands and Iceland are consulting U.S. lawyers about ways to stop the Justice Department getting their Twitter records in a probe into the leak of secret documents.

“We are on Sarah Palin’s targeted list,” Ms. Giffords said in the interview. “The way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of the gunsight over our district. When people do that, they have got to realize there are consequences to that action.” … (LiveBlog nytimes.)

verified snapshots. on gawker, but well. sometimes you can’t choose where a linkable piece of words is.

—

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/01/the-market-for-palin.html “… The point Josh makes is a clear one. A political assassination cannot be dismissed as non-political. …, it remains true that a) Palin specifically targeted this political opponent for “re-loading” within literal gun-sights, b) this was noticed at the time by the future victim as a dangerously violent provocation, c) Palin upped the ante when confronted with this criticism and refused to back down, and is even now …”

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/01/palin-responds-via-beck.html – “With what appears to me to be a renewed threat of violence: – “I hate violence. I hate war. Our children will not have peace if politicos just capitalize on this to succeed in portraying anyone as inciting terror and violence.” – It’s barely literate, but what can it mean that children “will not have peace” if people are held morally responsible for consequences of their violent rhetoric? How can asking people to turn the volume down lead to an absence of peace? Then this:…” (btw sarah selling herself as “hating war” and no one burst out in bright laughter about this? ;-] )

—

so… what to think about this now? think about this here (gun laws. selection of links to some recent articles).

Another consequence of the DOJ subpoena – by knowledgeempire, 9.1.2011 (sonntag) – …If you did view one of these tweets at some point on or after November 1, 2009 (the cut-off date in stipulated in the subpoena) but were not signed in to Twitter, then even if you are not a registered user, it seems you too qualify as a “connection made to or from” the accounts. There is no stipulation that ‘connections’ must be from users who are following Wikileaks et al., or even that they must be from users who are signed in. If Twitter logs visitors, and it certainly does, then visitor data will be in these logs irrespective of whether they have a Twitter account. / How significant is this and what information about you will be visible if you fall under the range of affected parties? …”…

sure, sure, one can understand everybody who would react in such a moment with “well i won’t make myself an easy TARGET…” and that’s for sure a – good tip. for anyone who never heard about tor.

but: I think this is not the only answer. is more hiding more paranoia really what we are ready to react with now?

we now have as follows:
634.800 followers (wouldn’t exclude will even grow now.)
plus
all the pips who ever saw an original bluetweet in their acc due to curious and forwarding pips in their list “following”
(well…. THAT’s a NUMBER…)
alright and then the data of the pips who actively clicked on a tweet unlogged.
(so also including all those soldiers curious about the heli case, for example. they have a large number of peole to throw out of their army, btw. even before they started this idea later with the afghan war logs.)

I mean seriously. what sense does tor or more hiding make under such circumstances. there are countries (far far away from USeverywhere Inc.), they already had such funny jokes and are able to recognize and laugh. one writer of such a country wrote (very, very free translation, kind of interpretation): so, he wrote: “OK mister, let’s see if I got it. You’re UNSATISFIED with your nation’s people. How about then to drop them and re-elect new ones?”

I hope the joke works in English, too. In it’s origin’s language it’s quite a hammer.

for the surprising number of curious USAsians, it works, because for those who already had a USA ID, they had something like this. for the others we can write on the “ups. today i went to wikileaks and picked up my new US ID for free. didn’t know it’s so easy.” – so then it will work even for the rest: go mister buy yourself an own planet and elect your new global citizens (USAeverywhere Inc. members) there. here you hardly will be able to change anything.

this for USAeverywhere Inc.

for US it’s still the same – they are thinking their law applies globally just because the comp base is on the moon. forget!

so making tor – making the effort just because USA has people with underdevelopped intellect and a bit astonishing history lessons gaps in their gov – c’mon.

hot: “he did not believe that any internet based medium could be a real member of the press.” – so guardian, spiegel, taz too… you better take you down: go off, asap. this will spread.

“… So, today I called David Pitchford, the guy who is suing Julian Assange in civil court (and has sued Osama bin Laden). I only got his voice mail so I left a message which went something like, “Hi, I heard on the internet that you are suing Assange and Wikileaks in a civil court. …”

update: http://www.keysnet.com/2011/03/05/315166/spelling-fixed-wikileaks-lawsuit.html – Spelling amended “So as not to appear the village idiot!” and: “He added the Associated Press … as a defendant in the amended suit because “without the Associated Press, there would be no WikiLeaks,” Pitchford said. “I see Assange as an agent of the Associated Press.” – “The Associated Press cannot hide behind the First Amendment when committing negligence.” …”